theguru

It is a big jump up to the WNBA and I think her team is expecting a lot of her. Plus, so many of the women in the WNBA are absolute super athletes that probably give their best efforts against Clark. I agree she needs to zip it, watch her body language, and play ball.

You (I assume) and I don't have "any money" to speak of. In this case he would pay to make this whole thing go away and maintain his name, image, and likeness.

That is not my area of expertise but I doubt there would be a claim in a case like this. When people with money injure and/or wrong others, they usually end up paying. And putting myself in Scheffler's shoes, I know I didn't comply, I know a police officer was injured, I know I tell/show everyone what a great guy I am, I know if I don't pay I am probably going to get sued, I know if I get sued all the ugly details are going to come out, I know it could stretch on for years, and most of all I know I need to make this right because I know I did wrong. Again, that is me in Scheffler's shoes.

Scheffler's criminal conduct resulted in injuries to Detective Gillis.

I think Scheffler's intent was to get into the golf course and get warmed up for the PGA Championship. But to your point, I am still going with Scheffler will plea to something like Charge 4: Disregard Signals From Officers Directing Traffic and Scheffler will pay the injured officer.

Also remember what is in the post arrest complaint, it says: Detective Gillis was in the middle of the westbound lanes, in full LMPD uniform and a hi-visibility yellow reflective rain jacket. ============== So any defense of I didn't know it was a police officer is a huge reach.

Claiming you didn't know it was an officer would be a convenient defense for every criminal. But more to your point, this is why I included the lesser charge of Assault 3rd because under Assault 3rd intent is not a factor, all you have to be is reckless and have it result in an injury to a peace officer. sf41 addressed this a few days ago about intent: Yeah, to spell that out even further. You don't have to have intent to do it, just be reckless, in a manor which results in it. The assault 2nd surprised me but again, I know nothing about what happened this morning.

Intentional is the hardest mental state to prove but Scheffler's comments about not knowing it was a police officer would probably lead a reasonable person to believe that his act of "not stopping" was in fact intentional. So as I have learned more I think Assault 2nd with the intentional mental state is the correct charge because Scheffler incriminated himself. At least in my opinion he did.

Yes. With that said, a prosecutor will quickly strike you down if you error here. Additionally, we are looking at an Intentional mental state here with the crime as charged.

501.020 Definition of mental states. The following definitions apply in the Kentucky Penal Code: (1) "Intentionally" -- A person acts intentionally with respect to a result or to conduct described by a statute defining an offense when his conscious objective is to cause that result or to engage in that conduct. (2) "Knowingly" -- A person acts knowingly with respect to conduct or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that the circumstance exists. (3) "Wantonly" -- A person acts wantonly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. A person who creates such a risk but is unaware thereof solely by reason of voluntary intoxication also acts wantonly with respect thereto. (4) "Recklessly" -- A person acts recklessly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. Effective: January 1, 1975 History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 12, effective January 1, 1975.

Not complying and certainly continuing to drive with the officer either hanging on or on your vehicle. But that is just Assault 3rd. I actually think given the facts alleged by the police that Assault 2nd was the proper charge. Here is my post from Friday on this specific issue: So for it to be Assault 2nd you would have to prove an intentional mental state, as in Scheffler intentionally disregarded the officer's command and the officer was injured with by a dangerous instrument (the vehicle). (b) He intentionally causes physical injury to another person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument; Assault 3rd is a no brainer here (again, assuming what is on the citation is what happened). Recklessly caused physical injury with a dangerous instrument. 508.025 Assault in the third degree. (1) A person is guilty of assault in the third degree when the actor: (a) Recklessly, with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, or intentionally causes or attempts to cause physical injury to: 1. A state, county, city, or federal peace officer;

The KRS says if you are reckless and cause injury to an officer with a dangerous instrument (vehicle) that is Assault 3rd on a Police Officer. Again, Scheffler either complied with the police officer or he did not comply.

The KRS says otherwise.

So you are saying the minor injuries to the officer were made up and the police falsified the post arrest complaint?

First or all, he should not have been let out on his own with no bond. I know it would not be any issue for Scheffler to post a bond but that is not the point. The point is you want blind justice/equal treatment and if celebs/rich/famous get preferential treatment then justice certainly isn't blind. Now, once they let him out with no bond that put us down the rabbit hole. Fast forward to today, normally the perp would be sitting in court in his orange jump suit and then court would have been much different today. But since they already gave Scheffler preferential treatment, the prosecution was between a rock and a hard place today. If they just agree to the continuance it would be considered more preferential treatment by many so the prosecution had to object even though they knew they would be overruled by the Judge. With all that said, I am glad it was continued so the dust can settle and all sides can take a hard look at all the facts and come up with a resolution.

Assuming that is true (and I am not arguing the point) that would be standard operating procedure because in almost all cases the alleged perpetrator would be sitting in jail so the system is required to give the perp a quick arraignment.

@swamprat what are your thoughts on this one?

What are you suggesting with the police officer? With Scheffler, like I mentioned in my last post, my guess is he is getting the greatest preferential treatment of all time.

Let's face it, they are already treating him different. They let him out on OR and now they pushed his arraignment back until June. Considering the nature/type of charge, this is probably the only time in the history of Jefferson County that those two things have happened. Sure it happens all the time for much lesser charges and such but not in situations like this. Plus as sf41 alluded to, the Commonwealth Attorney of Jefferson County is probably involved in this. All eyes are on this case and it is one of those cases that could severely alienate and damage the relationship between the Commonwealth Attorney and every law enforcement official in Jefferson County. And on that point, forget Scheffler, (because we know not much if anything is going to happen to him) no citizen of Jefferson County wants that type of division. It is horrible for the city of Louisville/Jefferson County if this is not handled properly by the Commonwealth Attorney.

It looked like a normal court hearing to me.

I had a Facebook friend post this last night: Have to preface my post that I love what Caitlin Clark has done to elevate the excitement for college and pro women's basketball but watched the second half of their game Vs the Sun and she acted a bit too much spoiled brat Lebron for me!!! In the closing minutes of a winnable game she had a bad turnover, fouled after the TO then barked at the ref that she was fouled resulting in technical foul and free throw and ball for the Sun who subsequently won. In post game interview she could have owned up to her mistake that had a huge impact on the game at a crucial time but she didn't......not as big of a fan. Everyone is watching including young girls so do better Clark. It's more than shooting 3's and scoring points.

Which part?

I am still sticking with what I posted a few days ago.